St. Francis of Assisi: A Biography Paperback – July 1, 1979

I know I am not alone when I say that I love Francis; therefore, I love any study of il Poverello. Regarding the great question, "Who is Saint Francis", it seems to me that there are three approaches. The first two approaches involve sifting through the source material, and extracting the sources that seem to "make sense". Something in "Legend of the Three Companions" makes sense to you--yes, of course Francis would do something like that!--however something from the "Fioretti" doesn't quite fit. However, the "Fioretti's" story can also be found in the "Anonymous of Perguia", so you use that version in your biography, and forget the "Fioretti" altogether. From what I understand, this type of detective work will produce for you a biography either in the strain of Jorgensen (in which Francis is a supremely orthodox monk in love with the Church) or Sabatier (in which Francis is some romantic anti-establisher pushing against known institutions in the name of pacifism and ecology). I suppose one could also add a sub-approach to these first two approaches, which one could call the "fervorino"; in this approach, one simply writes a biography surrounding one's own enthusiasm for Francis. This approach will collect a pell-mell of random story and anecdotes from sources or later biographies, but the point is merely to speak of one's own "Franciscan enthusiasm"; as the Franciscan scholar Vauchez pointed out, all this approach really does for one is produce an autobiography wearing a Franciscan habit...The third approach--the approach which I have come to favor in recent times--is the approach of Manselli, Vauchez, Thompson, Dalarun, and other medieval scholars. This approach tries to collect the source materials, and then tries to tease from them actual events based on the rules of genre and the tropes of contemporary, thirteenth century hagiographic styles. So, for example, in Francis' Testament he meets lepers; in Celano's biography he meets one, specific leper whom he hugs; in Celano's second biography he meets one, specific leper whom he hugs and to whom he gives money; in the Fioretti he meets a leper whom he hugs and to whom he gives money, and then the leper vanishes in a charismatic experience which speaks of a Providential encounter with Christ. This third approach takes every version of the leper story, and tries to use literary techniques, archeology and more, to try and extract from this circle of witness "what actually happened".This biography, by Englebert, has been called "the jewel of the Jorgensen tradition". I would agree; there is here not much academic investigation; there is, however, a tendency to paint Francis as a charismatic poor man who does miracles, throws away money, imitates Jesus on a legendary level, and obeys the Church unflappably. This is a biography to which I would no longer turn, at this point in my own Franciscan investigations, but it is the biography upon which I grew up. It is a touching and sensitive story about a legendary figure we have all come to know and love.

It is with fear and trembling that I attempt this review. I dearly love St. Francis. My favorite movie is of his life, Brother Sun Sister Moon. Much of what my family and people group did and lived was based on his life. But I found this, supposedly the definitive biography of Francis, a rather unhelpful work.Englebert does give a lot of details into Francis' life- and give a much more accurate picture of him than the movie. I came to understand more for the first time how all the events and random stories I had hear fit together. I found, again, Francis to be inspiring in his example, encouraging me into Holy Sister Poverty, and pursuing humility, and serving others. I especially enjoyed his search for Joy. This was not an attempt to reach poverty out of duty, or even simply social justice- good desires in themselves. Rather, it was for perhaps the highest of motives- to know the Joy of Christ, to be in love with Him, to be served by Him. And Francis found, realized, that this could be found most fully in Poverty.But perhaps it is Englebert's approach which somewhat spoils the reading. He writes about Francis as if Francis were a saint- which of course he is, in both the Catholic and Protestant senses. But he seems to take everything that is believed about Francis- everything that the Roman Church says is true, and simply accept it, without winnowing out the legends. Englebert *is* stating at times that some stories have less authenticity than others. But even with this caveat, much of what he shares seems to be swallowed wholesale without reservation. I don't refer to the miraculous or the stigmata of course- there is every reason to believe that such events happened through Francis. But rather, the tone of the miraculous, and other stories, is of an other-worldly man, almost docetic. This leads to acceptance of everything Francis taught and did as righteous.But I found that, with this approach, as I read a 20th century biography of a 13th century man through 21st century eyes, I was less inclined than previously to see all that Francis did as morally upright. Certainly Francis' intentions were pure. But I found Englebert's uncompromising support of Francis encouraged me to question some of Francis' practices as actually all that helpful- such as a continual debasement of himself, without seeing more of the God in himself. Or love of fire, which compromised some of his concern for the environment. Or pursuing poverty to such an extent that he couldn't abound in some gifts that came his way- as both Paul and Jesus were willing to do, when the sat down at rich men's houses. None of this detracts from the holiness of Francis. Some of his beliefs were right for his time, and historical anachronism should not be practiced and it be expected that he know certain things back in the 13th century. He was, I still believe, the person most close to Christ since Christ. But he was also not Christ.All this I see more clearly because of Englebert's approach, canonizing a person who was an exceedingly exceptional man, but still a man. And I really believe that Francis would have really not liked such a description of himself. He would have preferred something honest, something authentic, and something quite normal, ordinary, and humble. I'm still looking for an biography of this saint that would be something like that.

This is the best biography of St. Francis I have found. Learned, informative, relying upon original sources, but avoiding a dry academic style, this book beautifully conveys the wonder, holiness and joy of the little poor man of Assisi!

This book was first published in French in 1947 (the author is a Belgian-born priest), then published later on in English. It is highly readable, and not terribly long (about 250 pages, as I recall), yet the author -- who draws very much, to his credit, on the original sources -- covers all the important elements and events of St. Francis' life and work, in a way that is moving and uplifting (but not sentimental). He gives just enough detail without giving too much, so satisfies the reader's interest without bogging the reader down. This is not the first book I have read about St. Francis, but it is the first I would recommend to someone who is looking for an all-round excellent biography of the saint.

I don't want to get into arguments about which (who?) is the greatest saint. Certainly there may be those who opt for Francis "the little poor man," and equally as certainly anyone interested will learn from this book that Francis was a great saint. Francis was loving, kind, tough and holy. Francis called himself (in the book) the greatest or maybe worst sinner, which he certainly was not. Englebert takes us from Francis's early fantasies about become a knight and growing -- with knightly honor -- into one of the greatest of the saints. Starting out on his own, eventually gathering a small band of followers be began perhaps best known of all religious communities, eventually sending missionary brothers to many nations. By choice he lived in poverty, but through this excellent biography, leaves us (readers) greatly enriched.

It's little, in depth, well researched, I love it, it will give you better than average knowledge on St Francis and the Friars minor my the end.

Well, I loved the previous copy which I inherited from a friend who went into a nursing home. But I lent it to a male friend who says he does not want to return it : ) plus it was old and split into two while in his care. So I ordered another one, but somehow that seller could not fulfill the order for some reason, and I now do not have a copy which I was in the middle of reading, while I ate my meals.Boohoo…Thereason I gave it four stars rather than five is because 1. it was in an old rather dense font format which I found tiring, Plus 2. it was not the most user friendly and one had to be well versed in the English language. which I am, but the font style slowed me down. Wish publishers would reprint old classics in modern user-friendly fonts.

I am happy with my purchase, would like the content to have a little more balance argument. But overall the book was extremely beneficial.

Wish we could have ALL books 'kindle-ised'! Didn't think I'd be able to get this one in Kindle version, so am very happy. Thanks a lot

Just as seen on the page top marks fast and perfect 10 out of 10